jurassicparkfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Velociraptor (novel canon)
Reclassification Okay, here we go again. Someone renamed this article again. novel velociraptor = 2 meters long real velociraptor = 2 meter long Achillobator giganticus = 6 metres (20 ft) long HOW ON EARTH DOES ARCHILLORAPTOR LOOK MORE LIKE THE NOVEL RAPTORS!!!!!??? 17:17, November 16, 2012 (UTC) Please be directed to my response to this here. 20:33, November 16, 2012 (UTC) :No! This is not JPL. If you want a Park Pedia article like this renamed you have to make your case here. Please be directed to the forum.MismeretMonk (talk) 00:15, November 17, 2012 (UTC) book "The Lost World novel their behaviour is somewhat different; they don't care for the young or each other, apparently because of "the evil prions." " Who wrote this and why didn't they read the book? They were that way because they were intelligent and thus had no instincts and because they were clones there were no raptors to teach them to be raptors so they were aggressive and their society was chaotic. This wikia sucks, all wrong or stolen info. :I'll ask you once to be civil. If you don't want to cooperate, you may leave. If you are here to help, then feel free to fix the article to be more in line with the novel. As it is written, it is poorly written, but not wrong. The prions were discussed by Thorne and Malcolm. Their aggressive behavior results from both that, and they small island habitat on which they are force to live on. --Vinny2 04:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC) : :I never read "The Lost World" but I did read "Jurassic Park" 23:02, August 16, 2010 (UTC)Crazy4Creddie Debate over "evil prions" Exactly. I hate people like that. Me 2 23:03, August 16, 2010 (UTC)Crazy4Creddie Prions can't be "evil". How can something that's not even exactly ALIVE be evil. Yeah, my toaster's evil too, it burnt my toast to a crisp this morning. The above comment doesn't really make sense though. If the raptors are intelligent they should be able to co-operate in a pack without the squabbling occuring in the novel. Please leave video Please leave the video! I think it gives the page a dramatic sequence! Wow 23:04, August 16, 2010 (UTC)Crazy4Creddie Why is the page locked? There is no mention of the fact that Crichton states in The Lost World that the Velciraptors are six feet tall (pg 211, Ballantine 1996). The article also states that Utahraptor was only just being discovered at the time, when I believe it makes a difference that Utahraptor's discovery was not released for another three years, the year of the movie's release (IMDB and dinodata.com). ThunderRollin 19:29, May 24, 2011 (UTC) Alternate Novel Raptor Theory I hate to cause trouble, but I don't think the novel raptors are supposed to be Achillobators. Yes, I know Henry Wu said that the DNA sample came from China, but there's some things about the time period of the writing and Michael Crichton's writing style that you have to remember: You see, Michael Crichton's description of the depicted dinosaurs and related animals seems to suffer from "all-species-under the-same-genus are-the-same-syndrome". This is a common science-fiction writing error that can be summed up as follows: "If a member of one genus has some traits, then all members of this genus do!" Now you have to remember, Deinonychus was classified as a Velociraptor by Gregory Paul at the time. You also have to remember that in the Jurassic Park novel, Alan Grant imagines the "Velociraptors" as "hunting Tenontosaurs". But how do you explain them as being as big as they were? Well, back in the 1980s, Deinonychus were depicted as being more upright in stance, which made them as tall as six feet and as long as ten feet, rather than about fourt feet tall and thirteen long like they actually were Basically, the reason why there are big raptors is not because they are misclassified Achillobators, but because that's what people thought Deinonychus looked like at the time, and because Deinonychus was the best understood "Velociraptor" at the time, so, suffering from "all-species-under the-same-genus are-the-same-syndrome", Michael Crichton, Michael essentially described the Asian "Velociraptors" as being the same as the American "Velociraptors". Basically, the novel Raptors are in fact Velociraptors, but they were Deinonychus-ized because like many science-fiction writers, Crichton treated Velociraptors as basically being the same as what Deinonychus was thought to be like at the time, except Later in the Cretaceous, and Asian. Long story short, this is just another piece of proof that the Jurassic Park novel, awesome as it is, is a really outdated book. Still, I don't want to erase all claims that they are Achillobators, much less the arguments supporting the theory, because they are still very good, well-thought-out claims and arguments. I just want to present more than one possibilty behind the confusing novel raptors on this page rather than treat the Achillobator theory like it's the only plausible one. SuperGrantZilla (talk)